If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

Will the project to colonize Mars be done by tomorrow then?

simon

"Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote in message news:3c72c4d9$1@10.1.10.29...
>
>
> Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using
VB.NET
> I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
> under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
>
> Thanks, .NET

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

On 19 Feb 2002 13:34:17 -0800, "Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote:
>Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using VB.NET
>I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
>under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
>
>Thanks, .NET

Although I appreciate the sarcasm, the sad thing is that some
evangelists will actually read this at face value and be desperately
trying to locate the UN web site to buy a ticket.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

Too late,

I heard that Zane did it better and faster in C# last week :-)

"Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote in message news:3c72c4d9$1@10.1.10.29...
>
>
> Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using
VB.NET
> I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
> under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
>
> Thanks, .NET

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

> Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using
VB.NET
> I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
> under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.

****, all you did was solve world hunger? Geesh, with all the stuff in .NET
you should have been able to also find a cure for cancer. And in your free
time you should have been able to have figured out what really happened when
the universe was created.

Oh, and my friend who's building the next space telescope would like some
help figuring out the right materials to keep the thing from shaking when it
goes from the cold shadow of the earth to the hot sunlight.

Heheh. When you get that all done, can you use SOAP to send the results over
to my weblog? I figure all that should be worth a few thousand visits to my
weblog at http://scoble.weblogs.com Heheh.

PS: this post contains at least one thing that you +can+ do with .NET. You
have to figure out that is for yourself.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year. We have
kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last few years. I'm
seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6 and ASP.

It may very well be true that it takes an absolute beginner longer to write
Hello world than it did with VB6, but, as see by our experience, it takes
quite a bit less time to do real work. It is very difficult to make money on
Hello World. Most projects are large these days.

I've never seen anything in my career that offered that degree of
productivity improvement. But don't take it from me - keep listening to a
bunch of newsgroup junkies.

"Robert Scoble" <scoble@userland.com> wrote in message
news:3c72e6ec$1@10.1.10.29...
> > Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using
> VB.NET
> > I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
> > under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
>
> ****, all you did was solve world hunger? Geesh, with all the stuff in
..NET
> you should have been able to also find a cure for cancer. And in your free
> time you should have been able to have figured out what really happened
when
> the universe was created.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
"Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:
> We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
> We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
> few years.

Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
> I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
> and ASP.

OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
doesn't look like all that much.

Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
VS6 than in .NET?

"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...
> In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
> "Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:
>
> > We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
> > We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
> > few years.
>
> Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
> from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
>
> > I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
> > and ASP.
>
> OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
> shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
> doesn't look like all that much.
>
> Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
> app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
> VS6 than in .NET?
>
>
> --
>
> W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD
>
> *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
> * CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
> * * *
> * Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
> * Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
> * or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
> * * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
> *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

Hi Bill-

"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...
> Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
> from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?

Well, the web app committed to running on B2 until its first rev, so
migration wasn't an issue there.

The 2 Winform apps migrated (B2-final) with no modification to the code. We
didn't deploy them until after we had the final build, so it wasn't an issue
there. Regardless, what is your point? My example dealt with productivity
differences due to .NET features. How would migration pains from B2 to final
be relevant to that issue?
> > I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
> > and ASP.
>
> OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
> shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
> doesn't look like all that much.

Are you saying that my sample is too small, or that your pals write more
code than mine? We wrote a lot of VB6 code too - hundreds of thousands of
lines of it in one app alone last year, and have over a million users of
another app. Our VB7 apps were similar to our VB6 apps, so I was comparing
very similar projects built by the same people with two different dev
products.
>
> Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
> app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
> VS6 than in .NET?

Undoubtedly it does, and undoubtedly there are. Very small apps are likely
to be easier to build in VB6 than .NET. For example, VB7 requires that the
coder understand the difference between a designer, a class, and an instance
of the class for any app having more than one form. You still get the
single-form auto-instantiation for free, but those who depended on it will
have trouble when they attempt to display an instance of Form2 by calling
Form2.Show.

I don't think I've ever sold an Windows app that didn't really require
understanding objects and instances. I'm absolutely sure I've never worked
on a web project that didn't require that knowledge. I suspect that the
majority of MS's dev product income is derived from companies with projects
more like mine than like Hello World.

BTW, our least experienced folks had very little difficulty grasping OOP
principles and gaining productivity/reducing line count by their use. By far
the biggest hurdle was adjusting to ADO.NET, which is obviously independent
of the VB language. Oddly, people who never used ADO (old) often had less
trouble than ADO veterans.

Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
was greatly reduced. So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really are
finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded cynicism
around here. Be happy. Write some **** code.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

"Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> wrote in message
news:3c734271@10.1.10.29...
> Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
> was greatly reduced. So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really
are
> finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded
cynicism
> around here. Be happy. Write some **** code.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

Hi Bill,

good to see you again

"Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> wrote:
>Hi Bill-
>
>"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
>news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...
>
>> Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
>> from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
>
>Well, the web app committed to running on B2 until its first rev, so
>migration wasn't an issue there.
>
>The 2 Winform apps migrated (B2-final) with no modification to the code.
We
>didn't deploy them until after we had the final build, so it wasn't an issue
>there. Regardless, what is your point? My example dealt with productivity
>differences due to .NET features. How would migration pains from B2 to final
>be relevant to that issue?

Bill, give it up. The other Bill is a self-appointed authority on everything,
despite never having actually read the documentation thoroughly or tested
the product. You're wasting your breath with this one.
>BTW, our least experienced folks had very little difficulty grasping OOP
>principles and gaining productivity/reducing line count by their use.

Same here. In fact, everyone was pretty happy about the OOP capabilities.
Even the newbies in the group were pointing out how well-organized the code
was. We also had a few mid-level programmers who were dipping into Java that
said they finally had respect for VB as a language, and quickly started to
favor it over Java.
>By far
>the biggest hurdle was adjusting to ADO.NET, which is obviously independent
>of the VB language. Oddly, people who never used ADO (old) often had less
>trouble than ADO veterans.

Yeah, that sounds about right. It was easier for us because we used stored
procedures almost exclusively, and once everyone figured out how to call
them and deal with the datasets, there wasn't much fuss at all. I'd say that
it took a good four days to get comfy with ADO.NET, but it didn't seem like
much of a hurdle at all.
>Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
>was greatly reduced.

Very true. I've seen the same thing. I think the new IDE should probably
take a lot of credit for that. The tools are incredible at producing good
quality code, even without E&C or a design-time immediate window (although,
i did cheat and made my own design-time immediate window!)
>So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really are
>finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded cynicism
>around here.

Doesn't surprise me at all. Major change will do that. I know because I felt
disappointed in VB.NET in November of 1999 when i finally decided to get
a hold of it. It took me three months of solid testing before I became convinced
that .NET was definitely the way to go. I have to say that the last year
using the various beta versions has been an absolute joy to work with. As
of two weeks ago, I'm back in VB6 to do some maintenance in a client's app,
and I'm absolutely cringing at how primative it seems now
>Be happy. Write some **** code.

Funny how many *programmers* prefer to ***** over write code. Over 12 months
later, they are still whining and have yet to write one line.

Re: .NET equals Efficiency

"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote:
>In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
>"Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:
>
>> We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
>> We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
>> few years.
>
>Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
>from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
>
>> I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
>> and ASP.
>
>OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
>shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
>doesn't look like all that much.
>
>Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
>app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
>VS6 than in .NET?

Yes, as previously stated, Hello World is much faster in VB6. Oh. Wait,
no it's not. The fact that I can write a Hello world as a WinForm, WebForm,
Console App, user control, Web Control or Web Service clearly defines .NET
as "more productive."